Metzer v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Jeffrey Metzer's convictions for two counts of aggravated burglary, holding that sufficient circumstantial evidence supported the jury's finding that he was the burglar. The court also held that the late disclosure of a potential suspect and related information did not deprive Metzer of a fair trial under Brady v. Maryland because the witness was made available, testified at trial, and the evidence was not material.

Holdings

1. The evidence was sufficient for a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Metzer committed both aggravated burglaries.
2. The State's failure to disclose Makinen's identity and related information before trial did not violate Brady in a manner requiring reversal because the evidence was promptly produced at trial, Makinen was made available for interview and testified, and the evidence was not material because it did not undermine confidence in the verdict.

Questions Presented

1. Whether sufficient evidence supported Metzer's convictions for two counts of aggravated burglary.
2. Whether the State's failure to disclose before trial the identity and information concerning Rudy Makinen and other possible suspects violated Brady v. Maryland and deprived Metzer of a fair trial.

Disposition

affirmed